Who was responsible for the huge loss of life with the sinking of the Titanic?

Question

Please state who you think was responsible and why you think so backed up with historical facts, not just what you saw on the film...

By huge loss of life I mean that a lot of people were not acting in a responsible manner i.e. The Carpathian turned its radio off when it could have easily come and helped.

By Carpathian I mean Californian.

Answer 1

There are a lot of issues at play here regarding responsibility. The lifeboats were a huge issue. The davits for the lifeboats could have been reused if the boats were stacked or if the collapsibles could have been loaded into the lifeboat davits faster. More lifeboats had been proposed, but she was stocked with more boats than were maritime regulation of the day. There also was a supposed lack of concern by the passengers about getting to the lifeboats when the ship began sinking, probably translated from attempts to assure them that nothing was going to happen. As is common knowledge, several boats were sent off with out full capacity. But its not simply the lifeboat issue that the White Star Line went on the cheap with - the watertight compartments could have been effective in stopping the flow of water had the bulkheads extended one deck higher. As the water pulled the ship down by the head or bow, the water poured over into the other compartments.

Beyond those issues, there was never a lifeboat drill. People were simply unsure of where to go and were unwilling to leave. Except the third class who were not let up in enough time. But the disorder was a serious problem. That, along with the captain and crew's ignoring iceberg warnings in favor of a fast crossing. They also took a route too far north for April. There were bound to be icebergs. And as was mentioned in an earlier post, it was a calm night. Without binoculars, which were missing, and because it was a flat calm the lookouts could not see water splashing at the base of the icebergs as they usually would have. Also, the iceberg believed to have been struck by Titanic had just turned over so it was virtually black.

I guess, company negligence was really to blame. However, it could have happened to any ship. They could not have been aware of the poor quality of steel used to build the ship, but they were aware of the route, speed, and protocol. Was the Californian at fault? The crew probably was negligent for ignoring rockets ("everyone knows what rockets at sea mean") and turning off their wireless, but ultimately the fault falls on those who built the Titanic and not her builders alone, persay. Ismay wanted to turn a profit, especially as his ships were faced with competition from the faster Lusitania and Mauretania. It is a MYTH that the Titanic was competing for a speed record. Everyone knew that she was nowhere near as fast as her rivals. To counter this, Ismay and his company had to provide a luxurious (and HUGE) ship to compete. Luxury does not mean safety. Thus, to make a long answer short - the kind folks at White Star have to take the blame.

Answer 2

Whoever ordered the crap mix of the rivets in the side of the ship. Possibly the ship builders or maybe the White Star Line - whoever were being the cheapskates.

The reason being is that from examining the wreck it is now thought that the ship could have survived the actual impact of the iceberg itself and the hole it made would not have meant that so many of the underwater bays would have filled which is why it sank. The experts think that when the panel of the ship buckled on impact the rivets gave way and basically popped off like the buttons on a shirt down a lot more of the length of the ship. They have examined a few of the remaining rivets and the mix of them is very poor and cheap which it should not have been for a build that size.

I saw that on a recent documentary, but I can't remember what it was called.

Answer 3

the designer of the ship was just a tad stupid when he designed his unsinkable ship. also at no point did any of the people say the ship was unsinkale it was said because a navy ship that goes through ice ran into its sister ship and didnt sink it so the intelligent people thought that if titanic was bigger and better there was no chance that it would sink. anyway back to the designer, he built the boat that if one compartment filled with wate a gate would come down and seal that compartment thus keeping the ship afloat but the thicko didn t make the gate s go to the roof of the compartment so the water just reached the top of the gate and went int the next compartment and so on and so forth. but lets not forget that george bush and tony blair get the blame of everything else so its they're fault

Answer 4

White Star Lines for not having enough lifeboats and not having any sort of organised evacuation procedure to follow.

The ships staff did not fully realise the seriousnes sof the situation or properly organise the evacuation of the ship. It was apparently a free for all to get off the ship and into a lifeboat and obviously the rich and influential were pretty much the only ones who succeeded. Most of those who died were Third Class (steerage) passengers. Most the survivors were obscenely rich people from First Class. What does that tell you?

Answer 5

Ultimately it has to come down to the Captain of the Titanic.
I believe his name was Smith, if I recall correctly.

The Titanic had been informed by radio that they were entering an area of flowing icebergs by one, possibly even two other ships. The Carpathia had decided to sit out the floe and so was not moving and everyone went to bed. They did see a flare gun from the Titanic, but thought that it was fireworks, a celebration of sorts on the ship.

Noone had any idea that the Titanic would choose to go through the floe, and indeed it was a foolhardy thing to do.

The Titanic was built so that it was well protected at the front of the ship, but it was not designed to be so protected from the sides. The design relied too much on the individual compartments on the sides, and did not take into account getting hit from the side and scraping along an iceberg.

The captain was well-experienced. He was perhaps under some instructions from his company to try to break the trans-atlantic speed record on the Titanic's first crossing. That would have been a feather in the cap of the company--the unsinkable Titanic is also the fastest ship on the waters.

There were an unusually large number of icebergs flowing from the north to the south for that time of year, but as the Titanic had been apprised of this, it seems to have been pride on the part of the Captain to have not taken this into account. All the other ships in the area had shut down and were waiting out the floe.

No ships of that time carried enough lifeboats, and the lifeboats on the Titanic were not well-utilized. Whether one can attach blame to that, or whether it was a problem of disbelief and the panic of the crisis I wouldn't like to say. More lives could have been saved even given the number of lifeboats available.

That so many lived is in part because the sea was unusually calm that night. Some were able to swim to the boats and get in or on (those boats which were upside down). The courage and cool-headedness of one of the officers, especially, helped to keep some of the people together.

The Carpathia made a reasonable assumption that the Titanic would not try to go through that floe (and Smith had them going full steam ahead), but it could be argued that they should have checked with the Titanic when they saw the flare. However, I don't personally think they bear the lion's share of the blame.
My understanding is that they were following standard procedures.

The company must bear some blame, although they deny having put any pressure on Smith to make a fast crossing, it is highly unlikely that they didn't at least encourage him to do so.

That the ship's company does not seem to have worked out the evacuation of the steerage class tells against the Captain again.
More of their lives could have been saved.

On the other hand, the passengers, even the first class passengers, seem not to have known where to go or what to do, and many boats were lowered with few people in them because there was noone around to get in them--there seems to have been general confusion.

Part of this may have been due to the feeling of general hubris and pride in sailing on the unsinkable Titanic. No one was expecting anything bad to happen and couldn't really believe it when it did.

But in the end, Captain Smith must bear the responsibility. A Captain is in complete control of his ship, bearing legal powers on the ship, and he had enough information for him to have averted the disaster before it happened. It is hardly conceivable that he would not have been aware of the weaknessses of the design (as to side impact) as well as the strengths (against frontal impact), as these things were well known among ship builders at the time.

What he could have urged in his defense is something we will never know. He went down with the ship. But it must have been a terrible burden to bear with him to his oceanic grave.

Maggie

Answer 6

Ultimately, the Captain - it may not have been his fault, but by accepting his position and elevated status he has accepted responsiblity for all that happens on his ship. He knew that when he took the position. Your question was 'who is RESPONSIBLE,' right? The captain is always responsible. If he was unhappy with any safety aspect, he had a duty of care to speak out before the passengers arrived. Would you be responsible for a plane or train or boat that did not have enough safety features? He accepted the postion and the responsibility. It is not all that different from todays postions in management anywhere, the top person has to be answerable. They may be abroad or asleep or on holiday and completely unaware of the problem - but if you are the manager in charge, you took the job and the responsibility - therefore you are responsible, in the eyes of the law, and that is simply the way it is. Unfair, unjust and there may be others who go to enquiries to anwer their cases (ie the safety officer, the riveters, the makers etc) , but if you are in charge, you go to court, because like it or not, you are responsible.

Answer 7

White star line company the company who made titanic
The resason why is that they said that that ship was " unsinkable " and they also did not provide enough lifeboats and lifejackets to passengers. These guys at white star line company and i believe Bruce Ismay the guy who was the president of that company wanted to advertise titanic as unsinkable I guess so they can boost profits. They also said that titanic can sail at faster speed than other ships (of 1912 ) and they were pusing the speed limit of titanic that it hit the ice berg. And these guys got several warnings that there were icebergs at the alantic ocean. Still they didn't really take these warnings seriously. They didn't slow down when they come closer to alantic ocean that when they actually came close to the ice berg it's hard to slow down in time to avoid crashing the iceberg.

Answer 8

I heard on Paul Harvey's The Rest of the Story that the real reason that the Titanic went into the floe at full speed was because the ship was fighting a very serious coal fire. No one on the ship except a sum of the crew knew so as not to panic the passengers.

Answer 9

The loss of the Titanic is normally thought of as a disaster but it was also one of the first great rescues made possible by wireless telegraphy, something we consider normal today with rescues of stranded yachtsmen, mountaineers, arctic explorers etc.
There were well known causes - going for a speed record, ignoring warnings, inadequate lifeboats and the "women and children" code of ethics caused poor use of those available.

Answer 10

Going at full speed with too little visibility was a fatal command blunder, and its consequences were likely to be really serious. It's a cop-out to say "Yes, but if the rivets . . ." or "Yes, but if the lifeboats . . ." because when you make a big mistake, you can't start arguing that its consequences should have been less serious than they turned out to be. It's the first mistake that counts, not the second or third.